Here is a visual representaion of the scientific consensus on AGW being the cause of global warming..

No way is that accurate, and there are plenty of peer-reviewed articles on BOTH sides of the global warming argument. Truth is NEITHER side has been
able to irrevocably make their case, which is why we are still debating it.

Nor can we, as we don't have the base data to make the comparison. Differences in weather collection over the decades and amongst the different
locales make the existing historic temperature data unreliable at best, downright wrong at worst. Simple put, we don't know, and really can't know
until time goes on.

Yes you're wrong. It can still be cold despite global warming. You're confusing weather with climate. The overall average temperature is going up
but it will still be cold, and sometimes unseasonably cold. It was also 80F in Pennsylvania in January this year when it should have been 30F, so
your anecdote doesn't mean much.

And considering the fact that the entire Western half of the United States is on fire every year now, there's more anecdotal weather evidence for
warming than cooling.

Global warming can also cause it to be colder in some parts of the world because of the way it wreaks havoc on wind currents and pressure systems.

It's strange that a community that so often talks about how it wants free, clean, cheap energy to be given to the world, so often fights against
those trying to bring it. Instead you side with TPTB who control the petrol companies that pollute our planet while trying to keep clean energy
solutions off the market.

You're on the wrong side of history guys. You're going to look real foolish when solar and other clean energies finally replace oil and you spent
all your time trying to find ways to keep burning our planet for fuel.

Just think about that for a minute. You're spending your energy trying to help the mega rich corporations literally burn pieces of our planet away
at the expense of clean energy solutions. You could be helping raise awareness and funding for solar technology, but instead you turn foot soldier
for dying technologies.

I've got a horse and buggy I can sell you if you're interested.

"The horse is here to stay, but the automobile is only a novelty - a fad." President of the Michigan Savings Bank

Also I want to note that they are not going to be taxing the CO2 we expel from our bodies. This is just scaremongering from TPTB that want to keep
their energy monopoly.

The world has a balance of CO2 and Oxygen as you said. The animals breath out the CO2 and the trees take that and give us back the Oxygen. This back
and forth fluctuates but as one decreases, the other increases in natural cycles. We can also see from ice core samples that periods of high CO2 were
also periods of high temperature.

The difference is we are now digging up millenia old carbon which is no longer part of the natural cycle and converting it into CO2 and
pumping it into the atmosphere. We now have more CO2 than our (ever dwindling) forests can consume and so we are overloading our planet.

That is the carbon they want to tax. The carbon that is NOT part of the natural cycle of earth, which we dug from deep underground and
artificially introduced to the environment.

They will not be taxing your breath.

That is a lie.

Do some research on what I just said and you will see that you are being lied to.

I would add to that that in countries like Australia and NZ there is a thing called the carbon credit too. Land that has trees on it is counted as
being a carbon sink and therefore helping the cause. The simple concept behind it is to get people to plant more trees and diversify into anything
else that might use up CO2 i.e Algae farms or any new technology that can safely store / convert the CO2 back into good ole O2

Farmers for instance can lower their carbon tax by planting copses of trees on their farm in areas that are not prime land for grazing or cropping.
These trees in turn can be managed for timber, could grow nuts or fruit etc etc so there is a potential for double benefit to the farmers that do
plant them.

Climate change is a very difficult thing to grasp when living in cities. Our lives within their confines are extremely disconnected from nature and we
miss seeing and understanding the natural cycles of seasons. We modify our building internal climates to be whatever we want them to be so we miss
the real feeling of the very hot and very cold days is one small example of how we are living out of tune with nature.

Having grown up on a farm and still having family in the business, I hear all the time about how the seasons are not like they used to be. Some are
colder and wetter, some arrive late, some early and some are hotter and drier. But the one thing that make us really go 'what's happening here' is
all the record breaking. We know that no two seasons year on year are the same, but to be breaking records all the time whether it be for heat, cold,
wind, rain, snow is a very unusual pattern.

Something is definitely changing our climate. Al Gore has shown that there was a direct correlation between temperature and CO2 levels in the
atmosphere historically. Whether there is a direct link i,e CO2 caused it is the part that is under debate.

To simply say that the climate is not changing is sticking however one's head in the sand. Global warming may yet turn into global cooling. It may
turn into just global wild and unpredictable weather. That's what scientists are for and trying to figure out for us, but mark my words the climate
is definitely changing.

Global Warming or Cooling who cares? The fact is the modern society treats our planet like s&*^. Climate Change may be natural and the earth goes
through cycles but currently the USA is still in serious drought, and the weather patterns are changing.

As others have noted, this kind of journalistic "reaching" is typical of Natural News. What's interesting is that, for a "news" organization
self-identified as one promoting healthier, natural lifestyles, you'd think that they wouldn't spin their stories in ways that benefit the
industrial establishment. Yet here we see them using one obscure data point to extrapolate the conclusion that carbon dioxide emissions don't harm
the planetary ecosystem, implying that it's A-OK to continue down the destructive path we're on.

It's blatant political spin, and directly contradicts the site's goal of promoting natural health. The global ecosystem aside, I just want clean air
to breathe and water to drink. The planet is going to do what it's going to do anyway. All the CO2 makes the air stink and burn going down. The
manufacturing processes used to create all of our industrial wonders do the same to the water. You'd think that's what they'd be worried about, not
the political agenda of "those damned liberals".

The ice at the North and South poles are melting at an unprecedented rate. The ocean currents are getting all wonky and changing the weather
patterns. Storms are getting much more severe and deadly. ex OKC.

NASA thinks that's a result of cooling?

Hurricane season this year is going to be Biblical. I'm glad I live in the Rockies!!!

Originally posted by evictiongnostic
You're going to look real foolish when solar and other clean energies finally replace oil and you spent all your time trying to find ways to keep
burning our planet for fuel.

Just think about that for a minute. You're spending your energy trying to help the mega rich corporations literally burn pieces of our planet away
at the expense of clean energy solutions. You could be helping raise awareness and funding for solar technology, but instead you turn foot soldier
for dying technologies.

I assume you know that you can't make solar panels without extracting from the planet the raw materials necessary for their production, right? In
other words, you can't make solar panels without oil fields and mines. We don't have Star Trek replicator technology (and even if we did, we'd
still need stores of the raw elements to be patterned). We can't even run the machines that make the solar panels without oil and coal.

You "alternative energy" people realize this, right? It's all still based on oil and other forms of mineral extraction, therefore wind turbines are
just as doomed as the combustion engine.

The answer is yes. However the current population of +7 billion cannot be supported by this planet without petroleum/coal.

The planet needs drastic reduction in human population. And till that is achieved, massive reduction in manufacturing and transport is needed to
control the increase of CO2 and other harmful pollutants. This means effective reduction in lifestyles all over the world, starting with richer
nations.

Every family all over the world needs to be restricted to one child only. People with genetic diseases must be excluded from having children.

I have been on this Earth for almost 66 years and this "anthropogenic global warming" issue is absolutely the dumbest thing I have ever seen. That
so many people are swallowing that stupidity hook line and sinker is just incomprehensible.

Build a sphere (you know a big round ball for those recently graduated) 800 meters in diameter and you can put every living human being on Earth in
it. We represent less than 1 part per billion of the atmosphere out to 5 miles. Now try to convince me that we are changing the climate.

The climate IS CHANGING it has changed over time since the Earth existed and it is going to keep changing but man's existence on Earth has absolutely
zip to do with it.

So you idiots that have swallowed Al Gore's Kool Aid can happily pay your carbon taxes and continue getting fleeced by him and his following of
mindless minions.

We are headed for the next ice age. The temperature of the Earth is going down. Those numbskulls are spraying stuff in the atmosphere to block the
Sun. Like the Russian climatologist said a few years ago.."Buy blankets!"

This issue of what's causing climate change is really mute. The climate has always changed, and done so extremely. One thing science has determined is
mankind has arisen at a time there the climate has been in a very unusually stable period. So unusual that it gives some weight to the argument that
it was planned that way by a higher power. (God, or aliens it makes little difference) Reason being is nature has in the past, caused far more
extreme changes to the climate. I'm sure that will happen again. This period of stability can't last forever.

I'm sure Man is not the number one producer of CO2, and I do not have the exact amount of CO2 produced by man, vs the amount produced my nature. So I
feel all our energies, research, and debate should be aimed at how mankind can use our technology to adapt to climate change, for I doubt we can
control the climate as they can on Star Trek. Another issue is our sun will bring global warming to a point that will destroy the inner planets. But
long before that, and perhaps in a few million years it will be so hot we may not be able to live on the surface.

So at the very least the world wide debate should be how to adapt to short term climate change (Scale of a Century) and what we can do about the
survival of the Earth, and mankind on a long term scale (Millions of years) rather than the continuous invasion of politics into a subject that should
be purely based on scientific facts rather than speculation, emotions, and politics.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.